Ridiculous DQ? I just got DQd after running 4:08 at mile sectional

Yeah this is an awful call.

Watch the 2004 and 2016 Olympic 1500 finals and note that both winners drifted into lane 2. You're allowed to swing wide coming off the final turn.

Well, this is one I agree with Rojo on entirely and yes, I do know the rules. It did not impact the result and makes the Group meet at next level worse for it. Advance Braddock anyway, this is kind of stupid.

On another issue, you know HS running has come a long way when 4:08.x wins a NJ Section and Gary Martin f Pa. HS, rom ArchBishop Wood , a Junior runs 4:03.x mile and no metions LOL.

My guess is the official is some clown who is hen-pecked at home and exerts the only power he has at High School track meets. I've seen dozens of these clowns strutting around like peacocks.

TomPettyLives wrote:

Not a DQ unless you made intentional contact.

Lies

Power hungry official that has no thing in their real life. They need attention and dying to enforce some petty rule that other officials don’t even look for.

This has to be a joke or those officials should be ashamed

100% a DQ. You cannot drift out to cut off a runner that is trying to pass you. That is a textbook DQ. You need to learn to not race dirty. Just because most officials are too scared to enforce the rules doesn't mean you get to break them all the time and expect to get away with it.

PS: screw letsrun for deleting my original post from last night. That is complete BS. There is nothing wrong with this post. My original post was nearly identical to the post above. There is nothing wrong with it. Stop censoring people for posting facts.

Sometimes they don't call stuff like this, but

1. None of the commenters dispute that you broke the rule.

2. It looks intentional.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime. I've got no sympathy for you.

Nobody has posted the exact rule. I found this from the NCAA but don't know if it is the same.

Violations include cutting in front of a competitor, obstructing so as to impede progress, or any action that causes another runner to break stride or lose momentum. Direct contact isn't necessary for disqualification if the action is deemed a "flagrant" attempt to impede another.

The other runner didn't break stride and the other runner won which is the whole rationale for the DQ, to boost the impacted runner to the position where they should have finished. For these 2 reasons, I don't see this as a DQ.

smarter than Astro wrote:

Nobody has posted the exact rule. I found this from the NCAA but don't know if it is the same.

Violations include cutting in front of a competitor, obstructing so as to impede progress, or any action that causes another runner to break stride or lose momentum. Direct contact isn't necessary for disqualification if the action is deemed a "flagrant" attempt to impede another.

The other runner didn't break stride and the other runner won which is the whole rationale for the DQ, to boost the impacted runner to the position where they should have finished. For these 2 reasons, I don't see this as a DQ.

The state rule is in the article posted.

2 THE GILLS!!! wrote:

100% a DQ. You cannot drift out to cut off a runner that is trying to pass you. That is a textbook DQ. You need to learn to not race dirty.

Do you practice your idiotic hyperbole in front of a mirror or just spew it out randomly?

Thanks.

It did not change the other runner's rhythm so no DQ. That is how I honestly see it after watching several times.

Al Sleet wrote:

2 THE GILLS!!! wrote:

100% a DQ. You cannot drift out to cut off a runner that is trying to pass you. That is a textbook DQ. You need to learn to not race dirty.

Do you practice your idiotic hyperbole in front of a mirror or just spew it out randomly?

There is not hyperbole there and nothing about what I said is random. The kid drifted out in an attempt to cut off the other runner from passing him. This is against the rules. Coaches need to teach their athletes not to do this and officials need to enforce the rule so that kids learn that there will be consequences for do this. I see this happen all the time and most of the time the officials do nothing which makes the kids think that it is ok to do it and that it is a legitimate race strategy. It is not. It is a dirty race tactic.

smarter than Astro wrote:

Nobody has posted the exact rule. I found this from the NCAA but don't know if it is the same.

Violations include cutting in front of a competitor, obstructing so as to impede progress, or any action that causes another runner to break stride or lose momentum. Direct contact isn't necessary for disqualification if the action is deemed a "flagrant" attempt to impede another.

The other runner didn't break stride and the other runner won which is the whole rationale for the DQ, to boost the impacted runner to the position where they should have finished. For these 2 reasons, I don't see this as a DQ.

I disagree with your analysis of the rule. The first part defines impeding but the end part states " . . . disqualification if the action is deemed a "flagrant" attempt to impede another."

The word attempt means that the violator does not have to succeed in impeding his rival, he just has to make a "flagrant attempt".

Note: In this particular race I do not think the actions were a "flagrant attempt" to impede the other runner.

smarter than Astro wrote:

Thanks.

It did not change the other runner's rhythm so no DQ. That is how I honestly see it after watching several times.

He made the kid runner farther than necessary to beat him. Just because the other kid was better doesn't mean the slower kid should get away with breaking the rules.

You were right on until your last sentence. He very obviously attempted to impede the other runner. He knew he was going to be passed and he tried to block the kid from passing him. Textbook.

Maybe the official thought it was a lane race.

My take after many years of being Referee of major college meets is this: You apply a rule if and only if there is an obvious infraction such as running out of your lane in a lane race or preventing another competitor from having the ability to run without being blocked from forward movement.

The runner that drifted out did not impede the winner, nor did he make contact with the winner, from the view of the video. The runner did not bang his arm or fist into the winning runner as he was being passed.

Where is there a violation? Too many officials see only black and white and refuse to consider all aspects of an event.

Common sense is at a premium in today's world.

I still remember taking a Polaroid photo of the finish line way back in the early 70's where our runner was the obvious winner of the hurdle race as shown in the photo, yet he was given second place by the officials. I was young and naive and took the photo to the official who rightfully told me to leave, as they would not look at it, since no other races had "photo" timing....ha, ha. Yes, this was in NJ. At least at that time they got it right, but did not pick the correct winner....

I wish I had been bright enough to invent a photo timing system, but along came Accutrak....

But that isn't in the rules. That logic would have him DQed if he stayed in lane 1 because the other kid would have to go further to move to lane 2. Stick to the precise rule. No rhythm was broken. No DQ.

I'm confused by the idea that "judgement call" DQs aren't reversible. If that's actually the rule, it's stupid and should be fixed.

And yeah, NJ HS officials have been a PITA for years. One year a teammate fell at the start of the overcrowded State meet 3200, so they called it back and DQ'd him for the crime of being tripped.